AI can now do hands (Midjourney V5 launch)

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

Shellshock said:
$$$

That's all they care about unfortunately.

Yep.

"I made a whole book in a weekend give me money now"

View: https://twitter.com/ammaar/status/1601284455410585600

Meanwhile the book looks like actual shit:

I think one of the most frustrating things about this AI shit is you don't even NEED to be a trained artist to spot the wonkiness. All you need is working eyes. OP went out of their way to delete a picture that showed off the same old flaws for example. Meanwhile keeping in various ones with flaws.

"Great shelf bro what brands of shoes do you have? Also love the duckfoot brand hat totally kosher"

TraderPoe · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
Yep.

"I made a whole book in a weekend give me money now"

View: https://twitter.com/ammaar/status/1601284455410585600

Meanwhile the book looks like actual shit:

God the hands. and every image she is different, AI art will be trash for a long long time

lvl 99 Pixel · Mar 16, 2023

isn't "I became an author" just all kinds of wrong because it was deemed uncopyrightable, as it had no authorship?

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

lvl 99 Pixel said:
isn't "I became an author" just all kinds of wrong because it was deemed uncopyrightable, as it had no authorship?

Yes. Which is doubly ironic when you consider that AI chuds have been complaining about having "their" images stolen in order to train the AI.

Jordan117 · Mar 16, 2023

It's been nearly a year since DALL-E 2 was unveiled and I'm still flabbergasted that this shit exists every time I see it. Economic and copyright questions aside, the mere fact that it's technologically possible to generate and combine raw visual concepts with the precision of Photoshop, to speak a thing into existence, is so incredibly wild. It's like being able to print out a glossy JPEG of the mind's eye -- hell, the other day I saw a first attempt at training Stable Diffusion on FMRI data that was making rudimentary progress at generating what people were physically looking at based on their brain waves. In a few years' time it might be possible to wear a headband and literally think an image into existence exactly as you envision it, without even the barrier of language. To make dreams and memories real in seconds. There are a lot of ways to abuse that power, but there's a lot of awe and wonder and possibility in it, too. It feels like we're edging closer to, if not understanding how consciousness works, at least figuring out how to tap into it more directly than we ever thought possible. Navigating that as a society will be rough, but in terms of pure science it's got to be one of the most fascinating and unexpected breakthroughs in human history. It's a modern miracle, and I hope whatever legal framework develops is more creatively enabling to regular people than de facto limiting it to the corporations with the biggest IP hoards and legal teams (or banning it outright).

DryCreek · Mar 16, 2023

Fridaynightcatlady · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
I think one of the most frustrating things about this AI shit is you don't even NEED to be a trained artist to spot the wonkiness. All you need is working eyes. OP went out of their way to delete a picture that showed off the same old flaws for example. Meanwhile keeping in various ones with flaws.

"Great shelf bro what brands of shoes do you have? Also love the duckfoot brand hat totally kosher"

Yeah, and it'll get better eventually but in the meantime, let's completely ignore how it's managed to create a scarily accurate human being. Which makes it even more scary. People can just use stuff like this to scam or make misinformation a bigger problem than it is. It's not perfect (though some of the pics are nearly there), but it probably will get a lot better.

Edit: Also, I would dare anyone to share these pictures on their social media/or whatsapp groups and ask people close to you if they're either AI or real people. You'd be pretty amazed how many people don't have "working eyes".

Baji Boxer · Mar 16, 2023

Looking at the example images, no it has not figured out hands lol. Closer, but still fucked up.

Midramble · Mar 16, 2023

Two or three more scholarly papers down the line, we're all going to be out of work. At this rate anyways.

The only thing I see earning money in the future is parasocial relationships... maybe I need to start streaming.

Mobius 1 · Mar 16, 2023

People calling themselves artists and designers by using AI generative tools is just rich.

Reym · Mar 16, 2023

GuessI'llDie.gif

Vourlis · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
"I made a whole book in a weekend give me money now"

View: https://twitter.com/ammaar/status/1601284455410585600

I checked and this chud had about 30 confirmed total purchases on Amazon so, we can still rest easy. He ain't disrupting much.

Moebius · Mar 16, 2023

Praise the fingers.

BreakAtmo · Mar 16, 2023

Mobius 1 said:
People calling themselves artists and designers by using AI generative tools is just rich.

Seriously. They're not even shitty versions of artists, they're shitty versions of people who order commissions and haggle on the price.

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

Fridaynightcatlady said:
Yeah, and it'll get better eventually but in the meantime, let's completely ignore how it's managed to create a scarily accurate human being.

Edit: Also, I would dare anyone to share these pictures on their social media/or whatsapp groups and ask people close to you if they're either AI or real people. You'd be pretty amazed how many people don't have "working eyes"

People can just use stuff like this to scam or make misinformation a bigger problem than it is. It's not perfect (though some of the pics are nearly there), but it probably will get a lot better.

I did actually. The roasting began immediately.
Most people can pick out entirely dead eyes. A spray painted beard. Weird hands. An entire shelf Did I mention the part where he looks like he's green screened in? Also kudos on giving the credit to the AI itself and not the chuds typing words. Let's continue to normalize that. 😌

InfiniteKing · Mar 16, 2023

BreakAtmo said:
Seriously. They're not even shitty versions of artists, they're shitty versions of people who order commissions and haggle on the price.

That seems like what it is. Bitter chuds who wouldn't pay a artist to make their OC art or porn for free and now they're going to generate it themselves no matter how shit it looks. Because fuck the artist and their work apparently.

Them stealing from artwork is just the icing on top, it's not homages it's theft.

Digital Dinosaur · Mar 16, 2023

InfiniteKing said:
That seems like what it is. Bitter chuds who wouldn't pay a artist to make their OC art or porn for free and now they're going to generate it themselves no matter how shit it looks. Because fuck the artist and their work apparently.

Them stealing from artwork is just the icing on top, it's not homages it's theft.

Visual artists have always inspired a particular, bitter resentment on the internet. It's a visual medium and pictures grab attention. Even in the 90s if there was a place anonymous chuds could leave a comment under an image you would see someone shitting on it and usually giving the game away by accusing the creator of being egotistical for trying to get attention with their picture. Like this was the standard script they all used.

There's some real "Revenge of the Nerds" energy behind all of this. Except these "nerds" aren't heroes bringing down jocks unfairly elevated by corruption and anti-intellectual culture.

InfiniteKing · Mar 16, 2023

Digital Dinosaur said:
Visual artists have always inspired a particular, bitter resentment on the internet. It's a visual medium and pictures grab attention. Even in the 90s if there was a place anonymous chuds could leave a comment under an image you would see someone shitting on it and usually giving the game away by accusing the creator of being egotistical for trying to get attention with their picture. Like this was the standard script they all used.

There's some real "Revenge of the Nerds" energy behind all of this. Except these "nerds" aren't heroes bringing down jocks unfairly elevated by corruption and anti-intellectual culture.

It's absolutely insane that it's been like that for so long but , in a way the more things change...etc.

These are exactly the people who might've read the forexposure.txt twitter account and sided with the person harassing the artist in their DMs/copying their art and using it and saying "it was on google so fucking what, I'm not crediting shit".

StreetsAhead · Mar 16, 2023

I don't like this.

Fridaynightcatlady · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
I did actually. The roasting began immediately.
Most people can pick out entirely dead eyes. A spray painted beard. Weird hands. An entire shelf Did I mention the part where he looks like he's green screened in? Also kudos on giving the credit to the AI itself and not the chuds typing words. Let's continue to normalize that. 😌

Dead eyes? lol. Care to make a survey in your social media and share it here? Also, it would be interesting to see if you yourself can tell a real pic from an AI. We'd have to test that as well :)

I don't care about the people writing the stuff behind, you're not gonna see me calling these people "artists" any time soon. I've been very vocal in other threads about how I also believe it's something that needs to be regulated, so feel free to look into my post history if you care at all. But I do think it's impressive, regardless of how I feel about the implications of a tool like this.

Soi-Fong · Mar 16, 2023

You know it's gotten good when the complaint that's thrown around is "dead eyes." Soon enough, the argument will be "not enough soul."

Folks can keep nitpicking and complaining, but this tech will only get better.

You can say "fuck ai" and "fuck ai stans", but that isn't gonna do jack shit. You really want to help, write to your congressman, write to your senator, write to the president that we'll need regulation around this.

Art_3 · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
Era is full of AI chuds salivating at the idea of being called artists without putting it in any work, passion, and the biggest sin of all, ANY creativity whatsoever. Every pic in OP looks like a skinwalker two seconds away from glitching.

Very Lovecraftian 91% human but there is just something uneasy about it, or straight up nonsensical nightmare fuel

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

Fridaynightcatlady said:
Dead eyes? lol. Care to make a survey in your social media and share it here? Also, it would be interesting to see if you yourself can tell a real pic from an AI. We'd have to test that as well :)

Those eyes look as convincing for a real person as the several hats on the shelf look like actual hats. Especially when the goal is "Look real under scrutiny."

Fridaynightcatlady said:
I don't care about the people writing the stuff behind, you're not gonna see me calling these people "artists" any time soon. I've been very vocal in other threads about how I also believe it's something that needs to be regulated, so feel free to look into my post history if you care at all. But I do think it's impressive, regardless of how I feel about the implications of a tool like this.

If anything it's the narcissism on display from people who don't know how to create art, like even the basics, mistaking the stuff AI generating to be good. Because without that education, they have no inkling of what looks good in the first place beyond the media they consume and on top of that they take that bitter energy and instead turn it towards stealing.

Soi-Fong said:
You can say "fuck ai" and "fuck ai stans", but that isn't gonna do jack shit. You really want to help, write to your congressman, write to your senator, write to the president that we'll need regulation around this.

Why do you think my very first post ITT was "here's that recently released Anti AI scraping tool." And trust and believe artists have been working on getting legislation against this in various places around the world. AI images not being copyrightable being a good start. And several lawsuits being worked on.

AI art tools Stable Diffusion and Midjourney targeted with copyright lawsuit

AI art gets its first major copyright lawsuit

www.theverge.com

Art_3 said:
It's textbook Lovecraft 91% human but there is just something uneasy about it.

It's the AI version of skinwalker tiktoks that use that one song from Wakanda Forever and a filter that makes everything look off. One frame away from glitching out and the victim realizing that they just saw the person drive away.

Fridaynightcatlady · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
Those eyes look as convincing for a real person as the several hats on the shelf look like actual hats. Especially when the goal is "Look real under scrutiny."

If anything it's the narcissism on display from people who don't know how to create art, like even the basics, mistaking the stuff AI generating to be good. Because without that education, they have no inkling of what looks good in the first place beyond the media they consume and on top of that they take that bitter energy and instead turn it towards stealing.

Why do you think my very first post ITT was "here's that recently released Anti AI scraping tool." And trust and believe artists have been working on getting legislation against this in various places around the world. AI images not being copyrightable being a good start. And several lawsuits being worked on.

AI art tools Stable Diffusion and Midjourney targeted with copyright lawsuit

AI art gets its first major copyright lawsuit

www.theverge.com

It's the AI version of skinwalker tiktoks that use that one song from Wakanda Forever and a filter that makes everything look off. One frame away from glitching out and the victim realizing that they just saw the person drive away.

Care to test if you can tell AI from real people?

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

Fridaynightcatlady said:
Care to test if you can tell AI from real people?

Care to test if you can pick up a pencil and animate something rn? 😃

Do you now understand the point being made. I don't care about what it'll end up like in the future, or if a layman can be tricked, or if you've succeeded at a gotcha using a model already. I don't give a fuck.

Because at the end of the day. It's still not real art. It's something an AI made in response by typed words fueled by zero creative expression with the closest thing to creative expression being the images that were stolen in order to generate a new one. Period. And if this makes me you feel bad, good. Wanna get over that feeling? That imposter complex? Well the solution is simple.

https://www.amazon.com/100-Sheets-Sketchbook-Artistic-Painting-Beginners/

https://www.amazon.com/Mr-Pencils-Drawing-Graphite-Sketching

JCR · Mar 16, 2023

Tom Scott put it best for me

View: https://youtu.be/jPhJbKBuNnA?t=42

Really does feel like with each of these advances, we're still only at the bottom of that graph and it's going to explode any day now. Even those deep fake videos Corridor Digital did a year ago look so quaint to what can be done now.

Fridaynightcatlady · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
Care to test if you can pick up a pencil and animate something rn? 😃

Do you now understand the point being made. I don't care about what it'll end up like in the future, or if a layman can be tricked, or if you've succeeded at a gotcha using a model arleady. I don't give a fuck.

Because at the end of the day. It's still not real art. It's something an AI made in response by typed words fueled by zero creative expression with the closest thing to creative expression being the images that were stolen in order to generate a new one. Period.

Am I even making a point that it's art? I'm not.

The Namekian · Mar 16, 2023

I don't know this might be too much for normal people

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

Fridaynightcatlady said:
Am I even making a point that it's art? I'm not.

Then why're you talking to me rn man? I'm not interested in your gotcha. Or the "see, THIS image thus justifies the creation of these images." I've made my point quite clear.

Vomiaouaf · Mar 16, 2023

Does anyone know a good tutorial or easy method to train an AI on a particular style? I' like to feed it my drawings and see what it comes up with with other prompts hopefully in my style.

eyeball_kid · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
If you can draw eyes without an ounce of soul within them you are already doing better than the vast majority of AI. Hands is basic anatomy 101.

Uh what, hands are one of the toughest parts of the human anatomy to get right. I've seen plenty of artists complain about them in the past. Back in my art days I struggled with them too.

Stath · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
Yep.

"I made a whole book in a weekend give me money now"

View: https://twitter.com/ammaar/status/1601284455410585600

Meanwhile the book looks like actual shit:

This shit simply shouldn't be allowed on the market. Fuck this guy.

Operations · Mar 16, 2023

AI is here to stay. Legislation will not unfortunately be able to stop malicious use, given how easy it will become to train it even from your phone in the near future. Society will just have to rethink human's role in productivity and arts.

Fridaynightcatlady · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
Then why're you talking to me rn man? I'm not interested in your gotcha. Or the "see, THIS image thus justifies the creation of these images." I've made my point quite clear.

You need to calm down.

Literally I started replying to you because we disagreed on how realistic the AI-generated image was and how it's not wonky at all (or not as "soulless" as you're trying to make it out to be). I'm not making an argument in favor of these AI generated images nor the people behind them. I've made it clear as well that I'm not here to support them and that regulation should be put in place. I've never justified anything but said I find the whole thing interesting and impressive. Look back into our conversation if you have to and no need to keep replying to me if you don't want to. You've certainly made your point clear, lmao.

lvl 99 Pixel · Mar 16, 2023

"you can't stop it!", "this is only the beginning" "its here to stay!" Reads like regurgitated image generation Discord leaking out. Nobody is trying to shut down machine learning as a whole.... that's never been the pushback. As if it needs cheering and defending at every pass.

WildGoose · Mar 16, 2023

Operations said:
AI is here to stay. Legislation will not unfortunately be able to stop malicious use, given how easy it will become to train it even from your phone in the near future. Society will just have to rethink human's role in productivity and arts.

This is the most depressing statement I've read in a while. AI taking over the task of creating art while humans only exist to toil away at meaningless manual jobs is the exact opposite of the "utopian future" that's been envisioned for decades. I don't want to live in that world.

InfiniteKing · Mar 16, 2023

lvl 99 Pixel said:
"you can't stop it!", "this is only the beginning" "its here to stay!" Reads like regurgitated image generation Discord leaking out. Nobody is trying to shut down machine learning as a whole.... that's never been the pushback. As if it needs cheering and defending at every pass.

It's like they just have to come in and urgently tell others that at every chance. Like jeez just piss off already

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

eyeball_kid said:
Uh what, hands are one of the toughest parts of the human anatomy to get right. I've seen plenty of artists complain about them in the past. Back in my art days I struggled with them too.

Basic anatomy=being able to draw people. Yes hands are difficult. Hence the many shortcuts. Any part of anatomy is difficult if you don't consistently practice. That's just putting basic effort in at the end of the day. Like at a bare minimum the part where there's effort involved is the bit i'm highlighting.

Fridaynightcatlady said:
You need to calm down.

Literally I started replying to you because we disagreed on how realistic the AI-generated image was and how it's not wonky at all (or not as "soulless" as you're trying to make it out to be). I'm not making an argument in favor of these AI generated images nor the people behind them. I've made it clear as well that I'm not here to support them and that regulation should be put in place. I've never justified anything but said I find the whole thing interesting and impressive. Look back into our conversation if you have to and no need to keep replying to me if you don't want to. You've certainly made your point clear, lmao.

We can disagree on whether or not people will be "fooled" dude. That still doesn't justify the use. The issue is "this is a clear and shady thing and here are the why it still doesn't hold up under scrutiny and screw the people using it." Your response to that should not have been "But what if I present something that tricks you?"

What would you expect me to say in response? Good job? "Maybe this ain't so bad?" That wouldn't address any of the critiques of the images in the OP, or midjourney, and AI image generation as a whole.

Jaymageck · Mar 16, 2023

lvl 99 Pixel said:
"you can't stop it!", "this is only the beginning" "its here to stay!" Reads like regurgitated image generation Discord leaking out. Nobody is trying to shut down machine learning as a whole.... that's never been the pushback. As if it needs cheering and defending at every pass.

Posts like this seem to equate "you can't stop it" with "celebrating it".

I'm doing quite the opposite. I think it's an absolutely awful thing for the world but I also think there's 100% nothing that civilization can do to prevent its propagation.

So I think people need to start taking their responses to this seriously. We need to start planning for how to live with it as part of the world. We need to think about what kind of policy can actually be enacted to prevent the worst harms. My main idea is huge reforms to education. We need to enable the next generation to survive this.

My issue is most people seem happy to coast by thinking "haha hands still bad, everyone can tell this is fake" which comes across as delusional thinking about where this going and trying to sweep it under the rug in the hopes it'll go away.

eyeball_kid · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
We can disagree on whether or not people will be "fooled" dude. That still doesn't justify the use. The issue is "this is a clear and shady thing and here are the why it still doesn't hold up under scrutiny and screw the people using it." Your response to that should not have been "But what if I present something that tricks you?"

What would you expect me to say in response? Good job? "Maybe this ain't so bad?" That wouldn't address any of the critiques of the images in the OP, or midjourney, and AI image generation as a whole.

I'm not the person you replied to on this, but this thread has been discussing "fooling" people within the context of deepfakes and the chaos and consequences that will have on society going forwards. You came in speaking to the artist rights angle, which is fine, but y'all are focusing on two different topics. We're not saying "wow this is so great" in a purely positive way, it's more like "wow this is so great, welcome to the hellscape."

But in terms of most of the public, a lot of images ITT would absolutely read as legit when scrolling through Twitter or Facebook and not looking closer. That's the worrying part of this, the "good enough" aspect.

Fridaynightcatlady · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
We can disagree on whether or not people will be "fooled" dude. That still doesn't justify the use. The issue is "this is a clear and shady thing and here are the why it still doesn't hold up under scrutiny and screw the people using it." Your response to that should not have been "But what if I present something that tricks you?"

What would you expect me to say in response? Good job? "Maybe this ain't so bad?" That wouldn't address any of the critiques of the images in the OP, or midjourney, and AI image generation as a whole.

Are we not able to both criticize the use of AI and simultaneously be impressed by it? Like, is your point that we should simply ban the discussion of AI generated images (or in general) in the forum all together because they're bad?

I'm not expecting you to like them (clearly, you don't), but my whole point was that these images are more realistic than you made them out to be. People (and I'm sure, even you) can be fooled by them. It's not a matter of whether they're art or not (I don't think it's art, if that makes you feel any better). It's a matter of how dangerous it can be as a tool to spread misinformation or scam other people online. Why do you insist in saying I'm justifying its use? Do you see me promoting Midjourney or something?

opticalmace · Mar 16, 2023

eyeball_kid said:
I'm not the person you replied to on this, but this thread has been discussing "fooling" people within the context of deepfakes and the chaos and consequences that will have on society going forwards. You came in speaking to the artist rights angle, which is fine, but y'all are focusing on two different topics. We're not saying "wow this is so great" in a purely positive way, it's more like "wow this is so great, welcome to the hellscape."

But in terms of most of the public, a lot of images ITT would absolutely read as legit when scrolling through Twitter or Facebook and not looking closer. That's the worrying part of this, the "good enough" aspect.

Definitely true for me. If I randomly saw someone post "here's my new jersey!" and then this pic, I wouldn't bat an eye.

Pikachu Statue · Mar 16, 2023

eyeball_kid said:
a lot of images ITT would absolutely read as legit when scrolling through Twitter or Facebook and not looking closer. That's the worrying part of this, the "good enough" aspect.

I don't think society is fundamentally any more fucked because of this. It will make things marginally worse, but it's not a huge leap in fuckedness.

Basically when looking at an image from now on, you'll have to rely 100% on "do I trust the source", instead of a mixture of "do I trust the source" and "does it look real".

Of course, many people will believe what they want to believe, as always.

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

eyeball_kid said:
I'm not the person you replied to on this, but this thread has been discussing "fooling" people within the context of deepfakes and the chaos and consequences that will have on society going forwards. You came in speaking to the artist rights angle, which is fine, but y'all are focusing on two different topics. We're not saying "wow this is so great" in a purely positive way, it's more like "wow this is so great, welcome to the hellscape."

I've seen the people acknowledging the absolute fuckery we're in for. I haven't been replying to them because they definitely get it.

eyeball_kid said:
But in terms of most of the public, a lot of images ITT would absolutely read as legit when scrolling through Twitter or Facebook and not looking closer. That's the worrying part of this, the "good enough" aspect.

I mean you could say the same about CGI images featuring photorealistic characters. Note, i'm arguing that based on the stuff in this you don't need to have mass amount of scrutiny to go "Oh, the fuck? That's not real." From the absurdness of the photos featuring high profile political candidates to taking one look at that soccer guy, the room he's in, etc. clearly I'm biased due to formal training and a career but my brain cannot parse looking at that and going "Oh shit, that's totally a real photo of a real person." People already fall for things on social media due to just scrolling back and not giving a lot of stuff proper thought. Social media is borderline defined by letting people do that exact thing.

Divvy · Mar 16, 2023

I had the pleasure of listening to Timnit Gebru and Abhishek Gupta, two leading voices in AI ethics speak recently and they both said they reject the notion that it is an inevitability, that the genie is out of the bottle. I'm going to take their perspectives on this rather than random internet doom posting.

cnorwood · Mar 16, 2023

Dirt McGirt said:
Someone somewhere is definitely working on an AI to detect AI content.

This will probably be integrated with VR/AR glasses when they become the new smartphone

eyeball_kid · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
I mean you could say the same about CGI images featuring photorealistic characters. Note, i'm arguing that based on the stuff in this you don't need to have mass amount of scrutiny to go "Oh, the fuck? That's not real." From the absurdness of the photos featuring high profile political candidates to taking one look at that soccer guy, the room he's in, etc. clearly I'm biased due to formal training and a career but my brain cannot parse looking at that and going "Oh shit, that's totally a real photo of a real person." People already fall for things on social media due to just scrolling back and not giving a lot of stuff proper thought. Social media is borderline defined by letting people do that exact thing.

Creating convincing photorealistic characters requires quite a bit of training and talent. With MidJourney anyone could create an image that looks like a black activist spraypainting "WHITE LIVES DON'T MATTER" on a police car, then dissiminate it in a white nationalist forum and incite violence towards that person or activist group. That's the kind of stuff I'm worried about, the ease by which groups can be incited into action with this tech.

TheHunter · Mar 16, 2023

Human Resources said:
when everyone was chuckling at generated dog faces in wallpaper, i was waiting

Human Resources

Crossing Eden · Mar 16, 2023

Fridaynightcatlady said:
Are we not able to both criticize the use of AI and simultaneously be impressed by it? Like, is your point that we should simply ban the discussion of AI generated images (or in general) in the forum all together because they're bad?

"Man that sucks but also like it's so impressive for real tho" is just normalizing the use. Because almost every thread comes off that way.

Fridaynightcatlady said:
I'm not expecting you to like them (clearly, you don't), but my whole point was that these images are more realistic than you made them out to be.

Not the ones the OP specifically chose to highlight. Hence me starting with, why do they all look like skinwalkers? That was my very first impressive, and then I looked closer and the same soulless image amalgamation flaws are still there despite their best efforts to remove those flaws.

eyeball_kid said:
Creating convincing photorealistic characters requires quite a bit of training and talent. With MidJourney anyone could create an image that looks like a black activist spraypainting "WHITE LIVES DON'T MATTER" on a police car, then dissiminate it in a white nationalist forum and incite violence towards that person or activist group. That's the kind of stuff I'm worried about, the ease by which groups can be incited into action with how this is massively lowered the barrier of entry.

That would be as useful as the "blacks rule" thing in terms of radicalizing normal people. Especially because AI chuds absolutely would be the type to think people beyond the usual suspects would be stupid enough to fall for that. If every state in the US had Florida's current energy than yes I would see that as a massive concern.

Fridaynightcatlady · Mar 16, 2023

Crossing Eden said:
"Man that sucks but also like it's so impressive for real tho" is just normalizing the use. Because almost every thread comes off that way.

That's your take? So I guess you do want to ban the discussion of AI generated images on the forum, then.

AI can now do hands (Midjourney V5 launch)

Chicken Chaser

Force of Habit

Saw the truth behind the copied door

Teyvat Traveler

Bold Bur3n Wrangler